Dear Aniko and fellow List subscribers,
My apologies for my own overeaction..."98% ~ deleted" etc. I had second
thoughts the next day as to the accuracy of that remark. I did read all
of the subsequent entries wondering how it may have offended the group in
any way and I regret any ill feelings it may have generated.
I also enjoyed Hugh's commentary on the cultural history of the list
itself. I have come to know of the academic beginings of such groups
through other attempts to understand the workings and history of the net;
but it was nice to hear a more specific overview about this list. And
"no", this is not the first time I have read a great deal of the entries
only to find some additional and thoughtful pieces. Rather, I have felt a
responsibilty to respond to thoughts of my own and of others which I have
heretofor kept in reserve.
Thank you for your candor and tact, something I obviosly need to continue
hone.
Sincerely,
Alan Hackett

Dear Alan:
Thank you for your letter; it was greatly appreciated.
>
I agree with your wholeheartedly about Hugh's commentary; until which I
really had no idea of the origination, and the progression of the list.
It's great to have that background. I found that it also solidified Sam's
comment in an earlier post, that it is a priviledge; as opposed to a right
to be able to participate. Also tremendously enjoyed the following posts of
all the members. Learning more of Horty was a real bonus.
Btw, if you are interested in learning more of Hungary during 56, I would
highly recommend that you contact Mr. Bela Liptak and request a copy of his
memoirs "An Ocean in a Tear". I found the reading extremely enlightening;
in fact, I recently sent a photocopy of it to my son; who has always had
questions relating to that era; most of which I was unable to accurately
provide answers for. I am sure that he will find most of his answers after
having read it also.
Hope you end up learning from and enjoying the countless contributors to the
list; and that you will form many a worthwhile friendships too. Looking
forward to your posts!
Take care.
Aniko.
PS: Phew!!! thanks for letting us know; that we are no longer subjected to
co-habitation with the good ol' Doc in such small quarters! Life in
Eudoras' Tcan was a sight to behold with him in there! ; - ).

In article >, S or G Farkas
> writes:
>This example is about a politician. Those gov. employees are always on
the
>job, their speech is never private (especially with an AP reporter
nearby).
>>Gabor D. Farkas>>>
It is not about a politician. The man was employed by a politician, but is
himself considered a government employee. He has not been elected to an
elective office. He has the same status as your average civil servant.
What he did was stupid, particularly given the fact that he himself had
covered the civil rights movement as a reporter in High Point during the
Sixties. Speaker Brubaker, by the way, fired him late Friday. The AP sent
a talking head to Raleigh to speak to the agency's reporting staff in the
General Assembly about the need to keep their distance from the people
they cover. (The AP reporter didn't break the story, a collegue who
overheard the remark from the next room did. I'm starting to think you
didn't read my post very carefully.)
Sam Stowe

Janos Zsargo or Eva Balogh probably have some insight into this question
-- is there a viable political movement in Hungary at the moment to adopt
a constitutional monarchy? How strong is it? Who supports it? And who
would be king or queen if they had their way?
Sam Stowe

At 12:16 PM 4/28/96 -0400, Sam Stowe wrote:
>It is not about a politician. The man was employed by a politician, but is>himself considered a government employee. He has not been elected to an>elective office. He has the same status as your average civil servant.>What he did was stupid, particularly given the fact that he himself had>covered the civil rights movement as a reporter in High Point during the>Sixties. Speaker Brubaker, by the way, fired him late Friday. The AP sent>a talking head to Raleigh to speak to the agency's reporting staff in the>General Assembly about the need to keep their distance from the people>they cover. (The AP reporter didn't break the story, a collegue who>overheard the remark from the next room did. I'm starting to think you>didn't read my post very carefully.)
Yes, I did. I made the assumption (perhaps the wrong one), that the aide to
a politician generally is an aspiring politician. And the colleague of the
AP reporter, wasn't he/she also an AP reporter? Or was he/she the aide's
colleague? A lot of the juicy press revelations are the result of someone
overhearing a discussion.
Gabor D. Farkas

> Who would be king or queen if they had their way?> Sam Stowe
I don't believe anyone is really serious about a monarchy in Hungary. Otto
has no interest in it, but it is notable that he speaks (I am told *good*)
Hungarian!
Martha

At 16:59 28/04/96 -0400, Martha Bihari wrote:
>> Who would be king or queen if they had their way?>> Sam Stowe>>I don't believe anyone is really serious about a monarchy in Hungary. Otto>has no interest in it, but it is notable that he speaks (I am told *good*)>Hungarian!>>Martha
Hali, Martha, Sam & All!
That is Otto von Habsburg, I presume. I don't imagine that if the Hungarians
opted for a constitutional monarchy that they would want the Habsburgs back.
Would there be any pretenders of Hungarian blood who might be more
acceptable to the Hungarian people? Hungary's identity as a nation is so
tied in with the Crown of St. Stephen and her Coat of Arms, it would almost
logical for them to consider a monarchical system - probably more along the
lines of the Scandinavian countries than the British, I would think.
Would be interested to hear your comments.
Yours,
Johanne
Johanne L. Tournier
e-mail - >>

On a recent trip to the Caribbeans I met a nice Welsh couple with a three
year old daughter. This was the first time I ever met someone from Wales and
one evening I told them about Janos Arany's poem, The Welsh Bards. They
never heard about it and were quite impressed.
What I was impressed with was, that their three years old daughter did not
speak English. Apparently, in Wales children first learn to speak Welsh
(their mother tongue) and later, in school they pick up the English
language. I also found out that in Wales there are Welsh language
institutions of higher education.
I am bringing this up becase I don't remember that anybody used Great
Britain as an example to follow in their treatment of minorities (such as
Welsh).
Gabor D. Farkas

At 12:18 PM 4/28/96 -0400, Sam wrote:
>Janos Zsargo or Eva Balogh probably have some insight into this question>-- is there a viable political movement in Hungary at the moment to adopt>a constitutional monarchy? How strong is it? Who supports it? And who>would be king or queen if they had their way?
I don't think that it is strong at all. However, between the two
world wars it would have been impossible to think of Hungary as a republic
and although the Allies forbade Hungary to call back the Habsburgs a
compromise was born: they came up with the idea of a governor while the
country remained a kingdom. However, the so-called "legitimists" were not of
the same mind. There was a group which considered only Karl and later his
oldest son Otto to be the legitimate king of Hungary while others had other
Habsburgs in mind. A couple of these Habsburg cousins were considered to be
the Hungarian branch of the Habsburgs: they had been living in Hungary ever
since the middle of the nineteenth century and they became Magyarized.
Otto's name was bantered around in 1990 as a possible candidate for
the presidency. The Smallholders (then not under Jozsef Torgyan) suggested
his name. He naturally declined. When I first heard about this madcap idea I
couldn't believe my ears. By the way, Otto, as member of the European
Union's parliament, is very helpful to Hungary in its quest to join the
Union. Even Horn's government invited Otto for a gathering of all important
Hungarians living abroad (mostly businessmen). Otto's family was always very
grateful for the greater Hungarian loyalty and even now they feel an
affinity to the country. For example, a couple of Otto's children's weddings
took place in Budapest.
I am almost certain that I am one of the very few people who are
sorry that our association with the royal house became severed in 1918. I
like the idea of a constitutional monarchy plus I managed to shed my typical
Hungarian education which was (as still is) very pro-independence, very
pro-Kossuth. I came to the conclusion that the Party of Independence's
stance on the issue of our association with Austria was mistaken. Historical
Hungary had no future without belonging to the Habsburg Empire and
unfortunately the Hungarian politicians of the Party of Independence were
unable to see that independence also meant the collapse of the country as we
had known it for a thousand years.
Eva Balogh

Janos Zsargo, quoting me:
>>Moreover, look around in the MSZP! Do you see anyone who could be prime>>minister? And please, don't bring up Mrs. Kosa--I don't like her very much.>>Plus, I think that she is farther to the left than Horn.>>This is a funny question. Well, I do not like MSZP at all, I think they should>not be in the government.
Why is it a funny question. Sure, you and I are not crazy about the
MSZP--with or without Horn. You, I am sure, didn't vote for them and I
wouldn't have either if I had been living in Hungary. However, the MSZP is a
very mixed bag. The so-called Baloldali Tomorules (the Left Cluster), in my
humble opinion, can hardly be distinguished from the Munkaspart (the
"unreformed" old communist party). Then there is the liberal wing: Vitanyi
and Bekesi and, I assume some others whose names are not as familiar to me.
But I am sure that although these people can work very effectively with the
SZDSZ, they don't really have a solid base within the MSZP. And then there
are those who claim "socialist sensitivity," and loath to follow the strict
economic measures necessary for recovery. Among these are many, many party
leaders, including Mrs. Kosa, Bela Katona, Ferenc Baja, Tamas Suchman, and
so on and so forth. All those who are more familiar with the scene than I am
say that Horn is the only man who can keep this motley crew together. In
fact, Horn's original tactics of creating a cabinet from all factions
backfired. The government was unable to speak with one voice. I don't like
Horn's tactics: his thoughtless introductions of brainless ideas without
talking to his cabinet and coalition partner about them. But as long as we
have this party in power (and I think we will for quite a while) I think
that there is nobody else in that party whom I would prefer to Horn. And at
least, after some fairly lengthy hesitation, he committed himself on the
side of economic reform, austerity program, and full-fledged capitalist
development.
>I do not say that it is wrong what they are doing in>the economics (it can be!), it seems good at least on short time-scale. But I>am sure that this policy has nothing to do with the 'socialism', which means>something is unhealthy in the government.
Oh, Janos, they don't like it either if for nothing else but because
of their popularity suffered terribly and like any other party they worry
about the next elections. But they have no choice!!! If they did, believe
me, they would not continue with economic measures which are terribly
unpopular. I am sure you are not going to like what I am saying here but
these measures, which were introduced almost a whole year after the MSZP won
the elections, were terribly overdue. The former, Antall government should
have introduced the austerity measures as they were told time and time again
by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. They promised
everything under the sun to these two international organizations and then
reneged on their promises. The former minister of finance, Lajos Bokros, was
terribly unpopular. The population was certain that he was the devil
himself--but he did something. Unfortunately his mercurial temper stood in
his way: every time he was upset he threatened resignation until Horn
accepted it. The population was delighted but we still don't know whether
his successor Peter Medgyessy, is going to be effective or not. And, as we
know all only too well, if they stear away from the austerity program, all
of Bokros's efforts will be down the drain. Unfortunately, Medgyessy is as
quiet as a mouse which is in itself no sin as long as he does follow his
predecessor's footsteps. Yet, I would like to see a bit of a higher profile
from him.
>So I don't really care who can be a possible PM in the MSZP.
I think that is wrong. Just because your favorite party didn't win
and because you don't like the MSZP it doesn't mean that it is absolutely
immaterial who the prime minister is. It does matter. Let's take an American
example. Let's assume that you are a Democrat and the Republicans win the
next elections. You are unhappy but surely it does matter to you who the
president is going to be: whether it is Buchanan or Dole. I think the same
is true in Hungary.
Eva Balogh

At 09:59 PM 4/26/96 -0700, Jozsi wrote:
>Eva S. Balogh wrote:>>>> I wrote a minute ago:>>>> > Semmi sem ragadt ra'juk. (A Hungarian saying: "Nothing stcuck to>> them."--doesn't sound as good as inthe original!)>>>> Especially it doesn't sound right the way as I let it go. Meant to say:>> "Nothing stuck to them." Doesn't sound as good as in the original!) But>> basically it means: they haven't learned a thing!>How about "Nothing rubs off on them"
I think that is an excellent translation. Thank you.
Eva Balogh

Dear fellow-listmembers,
Gabor D. Farkas raised an interesting point by mentioning the Welsh
couple he met, whose daughter spoke Welsh first. It's true that we
haven't seen anyone mentioning British policies on minorities as such
when examples of relatively positive policies are mentioned.
As far as I know (which admittedly may not be very far) the British
support for minority culture and language, in Wales and Scotland, is
pretty recent. I also had the impression it wasn't without strong
political controversy. Maybe George Szaszvari (after all, George, you're
_there_!) can say more from experience. I think there's Welsh-language
TV (government funded) and radio as well.
I can remember, back when I was learning Scottish Gaelic in Singapore,
that our teacher was interviewed by the Gaelic service of the BBC for
a little program about Gaelic in the wide world...
How easily any of this--policies, background, rationale, public attitude--
could be translated to other areas where minority policies are at issue,
is another question.
Sincerely,
Hugh Agnew

At 04:59 PM 4/28/96 -0400, you wrote:
>> Who would be king or queen if they had their way?>> Sam Stowe>>I don't believe anyone is really serious about a monarchy in Hungary. Otto>has no interest in it, but it is notable that he speaks (I am told *good*)>Hungarian!>>Martha>
Yes, Martha, Otto speaks Hungarian very well. I heard him on a
shortwave receiver about six years ago. He has a slight accent, but he is
absolutely fluent. The funny thing is that he "egy kicsit svabosan beszel,"
he sounds like a Transdanubian sva'b (Hungarian-German) with a broad accent.
>From a Habsburg mouth it sounded very funny--vide'ki sva'b hentes-type of
accent. (provincial German butcher). I like him very much, by the way. He is
an intelligent man.
Eva Balogh

Sam Stowe asks:
> Janos Zsargo or Eva Balogh probably have some insight into this question> -- is there a viable political movement in Hungary at the moment to adopt> a constitutional monarchy? How strong is it? Who supports it? And who> would be king or queen if they had their way?
Glad you asked the question. I am happy to report the Hungarian royalist
movement is alive and well, and rapidly growing. What gave the organization
a real boost is their recent merger with the Save the Dodo Foundation.
Since then, their annual convention had to be expanded to accommodate all
the new members flocking in, and is now held every year in a Cleveland
phone booth.
-----
Gabor Fencsik

Aniko Dunford wrote:
>> Dear Friends: (especially the US ones)>> If anyone is interested and nearby; I am absolutely positive that all of> them could use a cheer or two, three or more. Since I cannot (but would> love to be there) give them all a few on my behalf. Failing all this; how> about sending them *all* our very best wishes!!! Anyone interested can> contact me for fax#'s for their perspective and or preferred team/members.> Unfortunately, no Email's been set up so far.>> Regards to all> Aniko
Aniko,
Just a moment to say hello. Thanks for the e-mail and address. I'll
try to get a photo off to you shortly.
Doug

I just learned that Sam Stowe, who pretends to be The Judge
if we call Freedomfighters of 56 "szabadsagharcosok"
in our Hungarian language, certainly was *not* in Hungary
at the time of the revolution.
Make that "at that time, either". As Sam Stow has *never* set
foot in Hungary. A "true expert" (in this list) in Hungarian matters!
Sure, he can defend, nonetheless, Eva Balogh, the liar, who said
we don't call heroes of 1956 "szabadsagharcosok" ("freedomfighters")
in the Hungarian language.
Except that Sam Stowe does *not* speak the Hungarian language!
Some idiots, who subscribed to *his* arbitration in Eva Balogh's
lie, have just been had by Sam Stowe, who is doubly incompetent
to defend her.